Legal troubles continue to mount for ING and its discredited subsidiary Payvision. In November 2021, PayVicki LLC, a U.S.-based company, initiated legal action against both companies over a dispute tied to a Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA).
Background: Alleged Breach of Contract
Under the SPA, Payvision appointed PayVicki to provide merchant referral services, in return for a commission based on net revenue from referred clients. However, Payvision reportedly failed to fulfill its contractual obligations:
PayVicki’s Allegations
-
Payvision did not pay the agreed commissions.
-
The company also failed to supply supporting documentation related to those unpaid commissions.
-
As a result, PayVicki is demanding financial compensation for damages incurred.
Key Case Information
|
Case Title |
PayVicki LLC v. Payvision US Inc. et al |
|
Jurisdiction |
United States, Southern District of New York |
|
Plaintiff |
PayVicki LLC |
|
Defendants |
– PAYVISION US INC. – PAYVISION B.V. – ACAPTURE APAC LIMITED – ING GROEP N.V. |
Details of the Lawsuit
PayVicki is requesting a jury trial and is pursuing compensatory damages of no less than $225,000, with the final amount to be determined during the proceedings. According to the complaint:
-
ING assumed Payvision’s liabilities when it acquired a controlling interest in the company.
-
These liabilities include any outstanding debts to PayVicki for unpaid commissions.
The ING–Payvision Acquisition Gone Wrong
In 2018, ING acquired Payvision, a high-risk payment service provider, in a deal valued at €360 million. However, the acquisition quickly turned problematic:
-
ING discovered Payvision’s heavy involvement in unethical sectors, including high-risk merchants.
-
As a result, ING decided to wind down Payvision’s operations (see report).
-
The bank ultimately sold major parts of Payvision’s business—particularly those linked to pornography and gambling—back to the company’s original founders around Rudolf Booker, for a symbolic price.
-
The irony? ING had just paid hundreds of millions for a business it handed back for almost nothing.
Other Legal Proceedings Involving Payvision
Payvision is currently entangled in several other legal cases:
Ongoing Lawsuits
-
Donald Kasdon, a former client, has filed a fraud lawsuit against Payvision and its former associate T1 Payments.
-
In Austria, two lawsuits are pending from scam victims who lost funds via merchants processed through Payvision.
-
These legal actions allege that Rudolf Booker, then CEO of Payvision, knowingly facilitated financial scams operated by Gal Barak and Uwe Lenhoff, laundering the victims’ stolen funds.
A Tarnished Legacy for ING
Given the sheer number of legal battles and fraud-related claims surrounding Payvision, ING’s decision to shutter its controversial subsidiary is unsurprising. However, what raises ethical concerns is ING’s official stance—reportedly blaming the victims themselves for falling prey to fraudulent schemes facilitated by its own subsidiary.
Conclusion: As more lawsuits surface, the fallout from the Payvision scandal continues to reflect poorly on ING’s oversight and due diligence practices.